if it is done in a civilized manner. It gives an opportunity for the theorist to be challenged
I've never seen or heard of a conspiracy theorist who, on being challenged by the sorts of people that they consider ignorant (one of the core points of being a CT after all) for believing officialdom/convention; react in a civilised manner. Challenging convention, is after all; for them the point of their belief, and they mostly don't want their theories challenged. The lack of nuance of written conversation (like this forum) never provides the appropriate form for a calm discussion to take place, regardless of intent.
It' better for everyone if they either 1. STFU, or 2. stick to the types of forum where they can share their beliefs with other like minded souls.
here in the West
As said by people who actually are in the west, er, never.
There’s an irony, isn’t there, that conspiracy theorists like to wax on about pharma or governments or chemtrails or vaccines or what have you, yelling “wake up, sheeple!”, whilst blindly absorbing whatever random crap is next funnelled into their brains.
Which leads me to ask - are most conspiracy theorists a bit, well there's no other way of putting it, thick?
Or is it that emotions rule thier head? That belonging to a cause, a group with a secret which no one else knows, who you can wield some influence and superiority over is way more exciting and interesting that the often boring and compromised reality?
As long as the conspiracy theories aren’t racist I don’t see a problem with them being expressed on here, if it is done in a civilized manner. It gives an opportunity for the theorist to be challenged – often they spend little time in environments that allow that to happen.
Think I fall into this camp - their thoughts need challenging, and so do "ours", or we do run the risk of being our own echo chamber.
The fact that when they pop up on here it soon turns to abuse and insults from both sides reflects badly on all of us, though sadly many of us have personal reasons for running low on patience with them.
I'm OK with the racist views on here as well, however unpalatable they also need to be challenged. Most on here are of the dog whistle type, TBH, which need spotting and challenging even more IMHO.
Sunlight is a great disinfectant. Nasties grow in dark damp corners.
Boomerlives that stood out to me too.
Sunlight is a great disinfectant. Nasties grow in dark damp corners.
Nicely put
are most conspiracy theorists a bit, well there’s no other way of putting it, thick?
In my experience, far from it. Most that I've met are pretty smart. It's partly why, I think, that they are trapped by conspiracy theories. Lots of them are plausible, there's "evidence" for many conspiracies, they know to be cautious of obvious explanations, and they're cynical and don't take facts at face value, and it's a way, for some at least, of confirming for themselves, their superiority of people that they think aren't as smart as they are. They're often very good at defending their beliefs and at the heart of many, the outsider is put into the position of trying to prove a negative, with the obvious outcome that gives.
so no, I don't think they're thick,
Which leads me to ask – are most conspiracy theorists a bit, well there’s no other way of putting it, thick?
Or is it that emotions rule thier head? That belonging to a cause, a group with a secret which no one else knows, who you can wield some influence and superiority over is way more exciting and interesting that the often boring and compromised reality?
All of the above?
It's self-affirming. If all your life you've been told that you're, as you say, "a bit thick," then you come across something that you think no-one else knows, you're going to latch on to that.
The Netflix documentary "Behind the Curve" is well worth a watch. There's an entire community of these people. It's not just that they have a couple of harmless leftfield ideas, it's a lifestyle choice analogous with a religion.
this came up on my feed the other day
disclaimer, stupid people can have stupid ideas too 🙂
They’re often very good at defending their beliefs
IME they're very good at remembering stock answers to common questions / rebuttals. They're ducked as soon as you go slightly off-piste.
They’re ducked as soon as you go slightly off-piste.
sure, but that just makes you a shill, so can be safely ignored. Like I say intelligent theorists are difficult to argue with, and often just reinforces their beliefs.
the behind the curve documentary is fascinating, watching them becoming confused as their experiments prove time and again that the world is indeed round, but yet maintaining their belief In flat earth is a real insight into how they think. Plus of course for FE, the math you have to use to explain it is wildly complex. Which neatly reinforces their belief that they’re clever!
Which leads me to ask – are most conspiracy theorists a bit, well there’s no other way of putting it, thick?
Watching Behind the Curve & some other similar docs, I'd suggest not thick. I would suggest lonely & susceptible to wanting to belong to something. It's either the warm embrace of conspiracy club or scientology, Jehovah's Witnesses, or other religion. All of the aforementioned pray on lost people & give them a home.
In my experience, far from it. Most that I’ve met are pretty smart.
I used to work with a guy like that. Degree, we worked in a scientific discipline but he was very prone to conspiracy stuff and he also knew a really disturbing amount about weaponry.
Muzzle velocities of a dozen types of tank, the armaments of all sorts of fighter and bomber aircraft. Like, a really "how the **** do you remember all this?!" amount. The blast radius of various nuclear bombs... 😳
IME they’re very good at remembering stock answers to common questions / rebuttals. They’re ducked as soon as you go slightly off-piste.
This guy clearly had a good memory so he was rarely stumped - you'd see him scrolling back through his mind to whichever dark corner of the internet he'd read it on then recite away.
Massive anti-vaxxer now.
SciManDan on YouTube does a couple of good series debunking some of the wilder conspiracy theory claims but it shows up time and again in his videos, these guys (why is it always men?) honestly believe that they're debunking Einstein, Newton, Galileo etc all at once.
Which leads me to ask – are most conspiracy theorists a bit, well there’s no other way of putting it, thick?
I've taught or been the pastoral lead for a couple of lads that started down this rabbit hole whilst in sixth form and then went the full 9 yards shortly after.
I wouldn't call them thick but...... they were the sort of kids who couldn't quite hold it all together. They'd aspire to be the brightest cookies in their peer group and act like they were (and superficially you might mistake them for this in a quick chat) and then they got quickly found out in the next round of exams. The kids they wanted to be like just reamed them academically but even more frustratingly for them the kids who looked like they didn't really care or were too busy to bother academically with girls, music or sport would rock up and out do them too. They could just never see the bigger picture or have a clarity of thought. Frustrated and rejected from the life they wanted to have (neither cool or academically prodigious) is probably the best way to describe them. It's almost like they found a new truth they could be master of and sneer at others for not knowing like they thought others sneered at them. The sad reality is they had not previously been sneered at, just ignored as they were mostly invisible before. One lad in particular took to wearing a MAGA cap (this was 2015/2016 in leafy English home counties) making some pretty inflammatory (often racist) remarks. Consequently he got himself into a few rumbles with other kids and I had to be the disciplinarian. For a few years I'd open my curtains in the morning half expecting to see him stood at the bottom of the garden.
As long as the conspiracy theories aren’t racist I don’t see a problem with them being expressed on here
I do - but it's mostly selfish. I don't think of this place as too serious. It's not going to change the world and sooth troubled souls. It's somewhere to come for a daft debate, to ask questions and talk bikes. And sometimes to console. Also - a bit of an echo chamber is a relief from the angst of real life. It is not my life - far from it - it's a place for a bit of a chill from time to time. Quite honestly if it was full of CT nutters trying to convert or argue with the saner members it would just put me off and I'd not bother logging in. A bit like a pub that gets ruined by the pub bore regular that you struggle to avoid every time you go in. In the end you find somewhere else. I know what they think already - it's not healthy for me to hear it again; it just ruins a perfectly pleasant and placid evening. Also, lets not think that having them here prevents them soaking up the bile elsewhere - you can have multiple windows open in chrome simultaneously.
I’ve never seen or heard of a conspiracy theorist who, on being challenged by the sorts of people that they consider ignorant (one of the core points of being a CT after all) for believing officialdom/convention; react in a civilised manner.
Well I certainly have, perhaps it's the way you deal with them Nick?
Our once resident conspiracy theorist JHJ was always perfectly civilised, and in fact good humoured when he was engaged.
Plus to make things more awkward he occasionally had some very valid points.
it’s the way you deal with them Nick?
I never engage with conspiracy theorist, it's ultimately futile.
Good points from @convert
I want cake and eat it, I guess. I value STW for it's breadth of expertise, not just bikes but I've had advice from geriatric nurses (specialty, not that they're geriatric!), teachers, Uni admissions staff, firefighters..... various others, all in the last year. True Subject Matter Experts, who freely provide advice when asked. We have an amazing knowledge base on here.
I've also listened to opinion based debates and in some cases had my opinion altered or totally changed by debate (possibly happening right now) - so i want to hear counter views and to chew the fat with them. But in the right way, and at times debating on both sides turns into who shouts loudest or the internet equivalent of death by wordcount.
Is debating with conspiracy theorists, trolls, etc. adding to the experience. I don't know - but there can be a fine line between a contentious but well held view and the bad-actors, and if the risk of banning the bad actors too readily is we don't get to hear the contentious alternatives, I'd be wary of that.
And while I've tried as a NY resolution to not get dragged into arguing with trolls, sometimes it's fun to poke a bit
I never engage with conspiracy theorist, it’s ultimately futile.
As Lao Tzu would say, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step.
No one becomes a full blown conspiracy theorist overnight, it's a journey. Which is why it is worthwhile challenging misconceptions before the situation becomes unredeemable.
Conspiracy theories are a growing and destructive problem. They are often as much of a reflection of the problems of society as they are of the individuals.
I never engage with conspiracy theorist, it’s ultimately futile.
It's the same as dealing with any religious fundamentalist. I cannot recall any back-and-forth which led to even a minute shifting of their mindset. There's no possibility of a productive debate.
I've moved on from the idea that it is my (or our) job to try to rescue these people from their self-induced psychoses.
Add to that the realistic possibility that some of these accounts do not represent genuinely held beliefs, and are just ways to try to fill a narcissistic void via trolling.
@convert - well put. The only bit I didn't understand was
For a few years I’d open my curtains in the morning half expecting to see him stood at the bottom of the garden.
that he'd gone so far down the rabbit hole to go beyond an annoying conspiracy theorist into a full blown stalker / murderer type.
Ah right. So not a garden gnome then.
🤣 I just about choked on my coffee there.
Plus to make things more awkward [JHJ] occasionally had some very valid points.
A stopped clock, and all that.
The issue with people like JHJ is that there's such a vast quantity of spurious output that they have to be right by chance eventually. And that then just validates everything they've been saying all along.
Can anyone recall a moment in time where JHJ acknowledged that even one of his suggestions might be a bit weakly-evidenced? Or didn't just pivot into another picture of Jimmy Savile meeting a royal?
Ah right. So not a garden gnome then.
😄😄😄 That made me smile! He'd have made a good gnome - a really really grouchy one!
But more seriously yes - wasn't very pleasant. I was on his naughty step as part of the 'establishment' warping minds. I've heard it's not gone too well for him in recent years.......but fortunately I've moved to the other end of the UK!
Can anyone recall a moment in time where JHJ acknowledged that even one of his suggestions might be a bit weakly-evidenced? Or didn’t just pivot into another picture of Jimmy Savile meeting a royal?
Nope, never happened.
Makes you think...
Which is why it is worthwhile challenging misconceptions before the situation becomes unredeemable.
Countless research has shown that the most successful anti-conspiratorial thinking strategies are managed by time, empathy understanding and compassion by someone that the person has respect for, knows and trusts. A situation uniquely unsuited to a forum full of strangers, trolls mickey-takers and wind-up merchants.
Sometimes forums can be exactly the right time and place, and sometimes they are entirely the wrong place.
The issue with people like JHJ is that there’s such a vast quantity of spurious output that they have to be right by chance eventually. And that then just validates everything they’ve been saying all along.
Being right once does not validate everything they have been saying all along. It does in their own eyes, the eyes of people who want to believe them and (this is where it gets really dangerous) in the eyes of someone a bit susceptible that might just be scrolling past. I hope that is what you meant.
Can anyone recall a moment in time where JHJ acknowledged that even one of his suggestions might be a bit weakly-evidenced? Or
That wasn't the point I was making.
The claim was made that no conspiracy theorist ever reacts in a civilized manner when challenged.
Our once resident conspiracy theorist JHJ always behaved in a civilized manner. In fact better than many on here. I remember him as always polite and never insulting, despite the level of abuse that he received.
Countless research has shown that the most successful anti-conspiratorial thinking strategies are managed by time.....
You are obviously dismissive of Lao Tzu's observation that every journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.
No one is born a conspiracy theorist, it's something that develops, and how much conspiracy theories they embrace varies widely.
It might start off as something that they have read or been told by someone. If they feel that it sounds feasible they might repeat on here, for example. It is perfectly reasonable to engage with them whilst they are still open to counterarguments.
It's a spectrum, not all conspiracy theorists are totally closed to all counterarguments and unredeemable. Some might simply have conspiracy tendencies.
Our once resident conspiracy theorist JHJ always behaved in a civilized manner.
by civilised, do you mean flat ignoring anything that contradicted his ramblings?
It’s a spectrum, not all conspiracy theorists are totally closed to all counterarguments and unredeemable. Some might simply have conspiracy tendencies.
SciManDan references a couple of Flat Earthers occasionally who have managed to get out of that rabbit hole and accepted that it's all bollocks but they describe it as exactly like a cult - I've not yet seen anything that explains why they went down that particular route or what finally brought them out of it.
Maybe it just gets too wearing continually trying to justify your belief...?
Ultimately, a lot of these conspiracy theories don't really affect life as we know it. You can go to work, do normal everyday things etc whether the earth is flat or not, whether Diana was assassinated or not, whether the moon landings happened or not.
Our once resident conspiracy theorist JHJ always behaved in a civilized manner. In fact better than many on here. I remember him as always polite and never insulting, despite the level of abuse that he received.
I'd agree with that, with the caveat that it is perfectly possible to engage in some seriously bad-faith debating without letting the politeness slip. See also: Jacob Rees-Mogg.
This still has the effect of winding people up. Sometimes, making other people lose their rags and look undignified while maintaining your composure is part of the appeal.
Indeed there is sometimes some pretty nasty stuff said on here with a veneer of civility to cover it up (eg some comments on the "royal racism rumble" thread suggesting the victim was asking for it because of the way she was dressed) which IMO are far worse than displaying a bit of anger or getting a bit sweary about something you care deeply about.
JHJ was a strange one but granted, even though some of his opinions required some truly jaw dropping leaps of logic he never (to my recollection) showed any real biogotry or seemed to take it personally as CT types go he seemed like fairly decent chap, just so long as you stayed away from certain topics.
Someone I could actually "agree to disagree" with.
Ultimately, a lot of these conspiracy theories don’t really affect life as we know it.
The issue is that once you've been convinced about one of them it's much, much more likely that you'll be sucked into one of the truly toxic ones, one minute it's largely silly nonsense like chem-trails, the next it's Anti-Vax, Q-anon, Incel ideology and the Great Replacement Theory, all theories with an measurable bodycount.
You are obviously dismissive of Lao Tzu’s observation that every journey of a thousand miles starts with a single step.
By the time one is posting on a Biking website and you have a cache of photos at your finger-tips of Prince Charles and Jimmy Saville together, and your thought is not "Famous people have their photo taken a lot" then you're are well down the road, and you're not taking your first steps, and there's nothing that anyone on here is going to say that will persuade you that you've been wasting their time.
so no, I just don't engage.
"I’d agree with that, with the caveat that it is perfectly possible to engage in some seriously bad-faith debating without letting the politeness slip. See also: Jacob Rees-Mogg.
This still has the effect of winding people up. Sometimes, making other people lose their rags and look undignified while maintaining your composure is part of the appeal."
In all his posts that I saw, I never recall him stooping so low as to liken another poster to Jacob Rees Mogg
It is perfectly possible to engage in some seriously bad-faith debating without letting the politeness slip. See also: Jacob Rees-Mogg.
This still has the effect of winding people up. Sometimes, making other people lose their rags and look undignified while maintaining your composure is part of the appeal.
Quoted slightly out of context, but my gosh that is 100% on the money.
I’d agree with that, with the caveat that it is perfectly possible to engage in some seriously bad-faith debating without letting the politeness slip.
Bad faith? Are you seriously suggesting that JHJ was trolling and didn't believe any of his conspiracy theories?
I have no idea whether Jacob Rees-Mogg believes everything he spouts but I had no reason to doubt JHJ sincerity, or that he was responsible for "making other people lose their rags and look undignified".
And just to reiterate not all JHJ conspiracy theories were bullshit imo, eg Jimmy Savile was known by many to be a paedophile long before he died, and yet he was considered untouchable because of who he knew, probably also a lot of truth concerning dodgy dealings with the Saudi Royal Family.
Who is/was JHJ? Highlights please.
Jivehoneyjive is a former STWer who had a passion for conspiracy theories involving politicians and members of the Royal Family.
It was a total obsession of his. He posted lots of what he believed were damning photos of high profile people.
It wasn't all bullshit imo but he took it to an extreme and threads could be a tad overwhelmed by them.
I don't know when he last made an appearance but I wouldn't be in the least bit surprised, or disappointed, if he made a return.
Jivehoneyjive, that's the badger, thanks
Fwiw JhJ still posts but seems to avoid that sort of thread (mostly) and when they do post on that sort of thing there's a hint of self awareness too. Not sure if that means they've been harangued into submission, have started picking their battles or have just changed their world view but their approach always seemed different to the newer (often covid related) conspiracy theorists that we've heard from lately.
Jivehoneyjive is a former STWer
he posted yesterday? https://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/nuke-proof-giga-dodgy-frame-bearings-8-weeks-advice-needed/page/1/#post-12674923
